NN41, December 2008
The New Politics of Partnership: Peril or Promise?
Beyond Disappointment: Transforming Ideology and Practice in North-South Research Partnerships
By David Gutierrez, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva
Email: david.gutierrez@graduateinstitute.chKeywords
Research Partnership, Science, North-South
Summary
The main problem with the partnership and participation ideology is that it implies that it is possible to mitigate power asymmetries without first reducing resources asymmetries. Nevertheless, some ways can be imagined to go beyond disappointment in North-South research partnerships.
The early role played by science in North-South relations was obviously that of a domination instrument. Indeed, during the colonial era, the main Northern scientists? tasks in the South were to chart the new territories to strategic ends, make an inventory of the natural resources for their exploitation and export towards the metropolises, and understand the cultures of the colonized populations in order to better control them (Gaillard, 1999).
However, as a reaction against the ?former? power asymmetry between North and South, a new ideology spread through the international development field in the 1980s: the partnership and participation ideology (Hours, 1992; Kothari, 2001). Interestingly enough, it was during the same decade that the rise of the themes of partnership, cooperation, participation, communication and ?enterprise culture? took place in the management field. One can sum up the paradigm common to both fields by the following watchwords: maximum hierarchy reduction; increase of the weakest actors? agency; adoption of a win/win strategy based on a synergetic combination of the various actors? resources (Crozier, 2000; Kothari, 2001).
But, given that the mere presence of the terms ?North-South? in the expression ?North-South research partnership? points to an appreciable inequality between two categories of scientists, it is possible to see a fundamental contradiction between this inequality and the partnership and participation ideology.
A first step to demonstrate this contradiction can be to look briefly into the current reality of African researchers. With regard to the resources provided by their academic institutions, these researchers experience a significant lack of access to high-quality scientific information and debate, time to do research, and remuneration ? which often goes together with a lack of social recognition (Kouvouama & Tonda, 1992). Another important point is that many of them ? longing for social recognition ? are making a political career and/or carrying out consultancy activities ? of which the main characteristics are high remuneration, short duration and unimaginative use of a constraining analytical framework (Gaillard, 2002). Furthermore, the African scientific field is particularly affected by the global ?brain drain? phenomenon.
Adding to this empirical description a theoretical analysis using Bourdieu?s concepts of social field and capital (or resources) can be useful to show that ?good will? is not enough to eradicate structural power asymmetries within North-South research partnerships. According to Bourdieu (1984), each social field (e.g., the scientific field, the religious field, etc.) possesses specific forms of capital (e.g., a specific cultural capital ? consisting of knowledge and skills, inter alia ?, a specific economic capital, etc.) that can be converted into each other. And this is the total capital endowment of each field?s actor that determines necessarily his or her structural position and power within the field.
Thus, the main problem with the partnership and participation ideology is that it implies that it is possible to mitigate power asymmetries without first reducing capital endowment asymmetries.
And one can say that the North-South research partnership practice seems to be, especially in the case of partnerships with African researchers, less determined by the ethical content of this ideology than by structural asymmetries. One of the most visible sign of this hidden reproduction of the colonial domination is the actual and usual distribution of responsibilities between Northern and African partners: research agenda setting, activity planning, fund management, data interpretation, results dissemination (through publications and conferences) and basic research components are taken on by Northern researchers, while their Southern counterparts are in charge of data gathering [1] and more applied research components (Maselli, Lys, et al., 2005; Rath & Smart, 2006). Another perceptible sign of capital endowment asymmetries is the impossibility for some African researchers to meet the Northern researchers? expectations as regards result production (Gaillard, 1994).
As far as African scientists are concerned, these contradictions between the ideology and practice of North-South research partnership are therefore likely to occasion disappointed empowerment hopes and a perception of low valorisation of one?s work by others.
Nevertheless, some ways can be imagined to go beyond disappointment in North-South research partnerships:
? recognising and evaluating the scientific capital asymmetry between Northern and Southern partners (Jentsch, 2004);
? distributing explicitly the responsibilities among them according to this asymmetry;
? focusing on capacity building even if it is to the detriment of result production; [2]
? increasing the Southern researchers? usual economic, informational and time resources;
? converting their knowledge and skills into scientific capital.
Footnotes
[1] It is particularly regarding to this task that Houtondji (1993) considers that African researchers are the former illiterate informants? heirs.
[2] It is important to emphasise, however, that these three first ?recommendations? are likely to be very difficult to apply with elder researchers who lack the appropriate scientific capital but cannot recognise this lack if they want to maintain their local and/or national prestige (within and outside the scientific field).
References
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Questions de sociologie. Paris: Minuit.
Crozier, M. (2000). La clé de la réussite américaine : le partenariat In M. Crozier (Ed.), À quoi sert la sociologie des organisations? Vers une nouveau raisonnement pour l'action (Vol. 2). Paris: Seli Arslan.
Gaillard, J. (1994). North-South Research Partnership: Is Collaboration Possible between Unequal Partners? Knowledge and Policy: The International Journal of Knowledge Transfer and Utilization, 7(2).
Gaillard, J. (1999). La coopération scientifique et technique avec les pays du Sud : peut-on partager la science ? Paris: Karthala.
Gaillard, J. (2002). Entre science et subsistance: quel avenir pour les chercheurs africains?
Oléagineux, corps gras, lipides, 9(6).
Hountondji, P. (1993). Situation de l'anthropologue africain: note critique sur une forme d'extraversion scientifique. In G. Gosselin (Ed.), Les nouveaux enjeux de l'anthropologie. Paris: L'Harmattan.
Hours, B. (1992). Le partenariat: alibi et pratique. In M.-E. Gruénais & J. Copans (Eds.), Recherches scientifiques en partenariat. Montrouge: Association française des anthropologues.
Jentsch, B. (2004). Making Southern Realities Count: Research Agendas and Design in North-South Collaborations. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 7(3).
Kothari, U. (2001). Power, Knowledge and Social Control in Participatory Development. In B. Cooke & U. Kothari (Eds.), Participation: the New Tyranny? London: Zed Books.
Kouvouama, A., & Tonda, J. (1992). Partenariat scientifique et racisme ordinaire. In M.-E. Gruénais & J. Copans (Eds.), Recherches scientifiques en partenariat. Montrouge: Association française des anthropologues.
Maselli, D., Lys, J.-A., & Schmid, J. (Eds.). (2005). Améliorer l'impact des partenariats scientifiques. Berne: Commission suisse pour le partenariat scientifique avec les pays en développement (KPFE) : Geographica Bernensia.
Rath, A., & Smart, C. (2006). Promoting North South Research: Report of a Workshop. Retrieved 10 May, 2008, from http://idlbnc.idrc.ca/dspace/handle/123456789/34341
Full contents of NORRAG NEWS 41.
Download the full issue of NORRAG NEWS 41 in pdf.